The price of dissent was on full display last month as Senator Denise Batters was booted from the Conservative caucus in response to her attempts to force a referendum on Erin O’Toole’s leadership of the CPC. Batters’ expulsion is the most recent of similar moves orchestrated against conservatives who find themselves at odds with O’Toole and his pursuit of Big Tent Conservatism.
Such internal strife is not new to conservatives as many will remember the knives that came out for Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day and Conservative leader Andrew Scheer, as well as the battle around acknowledging climate change at this year’s CPC convention and the expulsion of former MP Derek Sloan earlier this January.
However, the CPC struggles with far more than just duels over leadership. A marriage of moderate “Red Tories” and more populist, far-right members, the modern-day Conservative Party is also divided on key issues such as abortion, COVID-19 vaccines and LGBTQ2S rights. In fact, it would seem party members spend just as much time and energy, if not more, fighting one another than they do fighting other parties in parliament — their actual opposition.
For a party that preaches unity, the CPC seems to be in a constant state of conflict under the auspices of maintaining one big conservative party. The reason for this is simple: as anyone who plays sports will tell you, team unity comes at the cost of individual autonomy.
Team members working together in pursuit of a common goal find strength in one another. What happens when that common goal is no longer shared is a breakdown of trust, diminishing respect, and growth of animosity. In essence, a party built on the guise of unity believes it’s planting seeds of strength, when in reality its foundation is throttled by weeds of weakness.
This is because the conservative coalition’s interpretation of unity is one of control and domination, in which the different factions within the CPC take up arms against each other in a perpetual war for the soul of the party. This “toxic unity” translates into public spats and an ill defined party brand which causes voters to question where the CPC really stands on policies that matter most to them, contributing to the party’s lack of electoral success.
So, is there a solution to the division plaguing the CPC? Believe it or not there is, and it lies in a value conservatives often champion: political freedom.
If parties are simply vehicles for delivering people and their ideas to parliament, then communities united around specific ideas should be in the driver’s seat of their own party rather than the backseat – or sometimes even trunk – of someone else’s car. Instead of struggling to stay united, progressive conservatives, economic conservatives, libertarians and social conservatives should pursue the freedom of bringing their beliefs to parliament as separate parties through the empowerment of Proportional Representation.
In fact, separate conservative parties under PR are often forecasted to gain more votes than the current united Conservative Party under First Past the Post. This means electoral success is possible for conservatives, but only by abandoning the perils of toxic unity and embracing the strength of inter-party cooperation brought about by Proportional Representation.
As long as no one group owns the mantle of conservatism in Canada, the CPC will always exist as one party with two minds. How are Canadians looking for a political community supposed to feel comfortable in a party that can’t figure out which way it wants to go?
Tell the Ontario NDP and Greens to show leadership on electoral reform!
Send a message to Ontario NDP Leader Andrea Horwath, Ontario NDP Democratic Reform Critic Peggy Sattler, and Ontario Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner asking them to say NO to winner-take-all ranked ballots and to show leadership on electoral reform!
Click here to send your letter
“Alternative Vote: A solution to the democratic deficit?” Webinar Recording Available
Fair Vote Canada recently hosted a webinar on the risks and consequences of the Alternative Vote (non-proportional “ranked ballot”). Learn why it’s a phony reform and a dead end for the campaign for proportional representation by clicking here.
Electoral Reform in the News
Proportional Representation continues to make the news as more Canadians wake up to the sorry state of our democracy. Here is a sample of what is being said:
- Conservatives have nothing to lose from electoral reform and everything to gain
- The success of Germany’s new coalition government offers lessons for Canadian politicians
- PEI Citizens’ assembly a welcome initiative
A group of young Canadians is suing the federal government to lower the voting age in federal elections. Thirteen Canadians from seven provinces and territories across the country, ranging in age from 12 to 18, are part of the lawsuit which has been filed with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. The group argues that election rules have changed over Canada’s history and should continue to do so.
At the crux of the group’s legal challenge is that the 18-year-old voting age violates two sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
- Section 3, which states that “every citizen of Canada” has the right to vote in an election for members of the House of Commons or a legislative assembly
- Section 15, which states that “every individual is equal before and under the law.”
The lawsuit follows an April 2021 bill put forward by P.E.I. Green Party MLA Karla Bernard, which sought to lower the provincial voting age from 18 to 16. The bill was defeated by a vote of 14 to 10, the second time in four years such a motion had been defeated.